[jazzyk]

>It takes serious work by good researchers to compile the data and interpret it

Ah, yes. The data need to be "seasonally adjusted" by high priests of the state, so that we, uneducated peons get the "appropriate" message.

Do you even realize how elitist your statement is? Sexual offence data is not rocket science, a lot of people can understand it quite well.

In Sweden's case, it would also help if the race/nationality of the attacker was disclosed (which, I heard, is not allowed in Sweden).

[gambiting]

>>Sexual offence data is not rocket science

It is though. The definition of sexual offence changes between countries. Simplest example being that in some places public urination is a sexual offence, despite not having anything to do with sex. And because that definition is not consistent between countries, it cannot be reasonably compared.

>>n Sweden's case, it would also help if the race/nationality of the attacker was disclosed

And why would it be? What for? A rapist is a rapist, regardless of their nationality.

You sound like a tinfoil hat aficionado to me, sorry.

[jazzyk]

>public urination is a sexual offence

You think people are idiots and can't distinguish between urination and groping?

>And why would it be? What for? A rapist is a rapist, regardless of their nationality

In the context of countries which accepted a lot of immigrants, it is to either confirm or dispel the claims that the attackers are mostly refugees from the Middle East.

>You sound like a tinfoil hat aficionado to me, sorry.

Please refrain from ad hominem attacks - it is against HN rules.

I simply want to learn what has caused the increase of rapes. The fact the the police (and the press) in Sweden were, in many cases, instructed not to report the race/nationality of attackers - to me - constitutes censorship.

[gambiting]

>>You think people are idiots and can't distinguish between urination and groping?

Well clearly so, because that's exactly how sex offender lists work in some countries, where there is no distinction made whatsoever.

>>In the context of countries which accepted a lot of immigrants, it is to either confirm or dispel the claims that the attackers are mostly refugees from the Middle East.

And my point is, what good does it do to anyone? Criminals should be persecuted with the same severity, regardless of where they are from.

Let's say that data shows that middle eastern refugees don't rape more than native citizens. I'm almost certain such raport would be dismissed by some(look two comments above) as "doctored" or "prepared" by the government that doesn't want people to know the "truth".

Or let's say that they rape more - What do you want to do in that case? Write special laws for them? In US, most criminals are black, but you should know very well that it's both because the are marginalized by the society and punished harder by the law enforcement, and not because they are black.

That's why I insist that we treat all criminals as criminals, not as "native criminals" and "middle eastern" criminals etc. There's just no benefit, except maybe feeding fear against them.

>>Please refrain from ad hominem attacks - it is against HN rules.

You are right, my apologies.

[DominikR]

> And my point is, what good does it do to anyone?

If it is found that people from the Middle East rape much more than native citizens or engage more in certain types of criminal activity that is destabilising the society then there is something that we as a society can do.

We can send them all back. We can send our soldiers to guard the borders and not let anyone of them in. That's a simple solution that would work.

I would even approve of forcing those who committed crimes to work until they fully repaid their victims for all the damage they caused. After that put them on a plane send them home.

But this is not about equal treatment, the elite and the media feel the need to obfuscate because they know that people are not going to tolerate this if they knew the full extent of what is happening.

[gambiting]

So....you would basically write special laws for a group of people. There's plenty of examples how well this approach worked throughout history(it didn't, or it worked temporarily).

Besides, I find the idea of punishing a whole group of people for the actions of the few disgusting. I don't know where you are from, but I'm from Poland originally, and especially in the 90s there was a lot of car theft in Western Europe done by Polish criminal groups - so Poles got a reputation as car thieves.

But you would have to be an absolute brainless idiot to say that all Poles are car thieves. And yet, you are proposing such solution here - assuming that "middle eastern refugee" group has more rapes - and you want to literally "send them all back". If you don't see how wrong this approach is, then I don't think I can help.

[DominikR]

No, there's no need to write specific laws.

If we follow the already existing laws strictly then not a single refugee would qualify for refugee status because they passed through plenty of countries in which their lives are not threatened.

After that we can decide to financially help support refugees that are stranded in Turkey and other neighbouring countries to Syria or we can take in a certain amount that we have carefully vetted to not be dangerous to our society.

There is nothing inhumane about this approach, for each refugee we house and feed here we can house and feed 10 in the Middle East. On top of that we wouldn't have thousands of them drowning every year in the Mediterranean Sea, because very few would try if they knew that there's no chance that they'll be able to stay.

Also we would end human trafficking by enforcing our borders. To me this seems like a win-win for every side.

Regarding the Poles are thieves issue: Stealing cars and rape/murder are not even remotely comparable issues. One of them is annoying and leads to racist jokes, the other one can lead to Germans organising/revolting and starting to indiscriminately kill off anything non German on their territory.

If the government doesn't protect their citizens right to not have their wive's and children raped then people will get rid of them one way or another, usually through uncontrolled violence. I'd prefer the government to do this in a humane way by putting them on a plane and sending them home.

But it wouldn't even have been a problem to restrict the entry of those Poles who are likely to steal cars. It's just a matter of asking them on the border: "What are you planning to do here and how are you going to support your self?" If they can show that they have a job here that can sustain them then you'd have immediately filtered out many of those that just came to steal.

This is by the way allowed in the EU framework. Each EU country can send you back to your origin EU country if you cannot prove that you'll be able to sustain yourself here. Most people do not know this because it's only been used in a few cases.

[DominikR]

One more thing: Why is it that you seem incapable of discussing an issue without using insults in every other sentence? This doesn't reflect well on your character.

[jazzyk]

>There's just no benefit, except maybe feeding fear against them.

There is already enough fear (justified or not). No data -> no diagnosis -> no remedy -> even more tensions, fear/hate, etc.